Religion's obsolescenence as moral guide

[UtahDan]

Don't take this the wrong way, but this is evidence of your ego more than a natural experience.

You should have saved that for a post where it made sense.

[UtahDan]

I can see that, but I can also see the opposite occurring- needing to enjoy life no matter the cost to anyone else precisely because ultimately it doesn't matter and all will be forgotten. Emphasize pleasure (short term) over joy (long term). Obviously this doesn't mean that I think non-religious people are going to always be less "moral" than religious folks- experience has clearly shown that not to be the case.

I'm curious, though, from the way you phrase your comment- are you falling more and more into the non-believer camp these days? Your post seems to have more than a hint of experience with this issue. Believe me when I say I am not judging no matter your response. I respect the internet version of you that I have met and think you seem like a very good guy. In fact, I have a high opinion of most of the "non-believers" on here.

I'm non-religious. And what I would say, really, is that human beings who seek meaning find it. No one has a leg up on anyone else in that regard, IMO.

[UtahDan]

I think creekster has a point. I try not to do this but I'm going to disagree with my apostate brethren here. I don't think that generalizations can be made that joie de vie or fear of death is affected by being religious or an atheist. The simple reason for this might be that religious people themselves are not as sure of their faith as sometimes they make out to be. I think that youth is wasted on the young is probably closer to the truth. I also think that life is enhanced by education, and religion tends to be an enemy of that.

Martyrs are a whole different class of people altogether and beyond the scope of this post.

We don't disagree. But I do think people who feel to make big life changes subjectively experience them as positive.

[Moliere]

I think the change is profound. I think it makes you value this experience even more, makes you less willing to shrug your shoulders at injustice (God will make it right one day thinking), more willing to experience all kinds of things, more willing to change your mind when new evidence appears, more inclined to feel like you need to get this one shot right. That is how I see many (but certainly not all) people experiencing it. That doesn't mean you can't get many of those things through a belief in the supernatural, desire for reward/fear of punishment, etc. But the belief that religious people are more moral is, in my opinion, an ignorant one.

All you've done is moved from one side of the cave to another. Sure the shadows look a bit different, but it's the same game. If that makes you happier, then good for you.

The goal of this life is happiness and happiness is defined by, IMO, by our worldview. Don't try and insinuate that you are happier or are living a better life through atheism, because you aren't, and it makes you just like the orthodox members of any church that believe that true happiness is only found in living the Gospel.

[UtahDan]

All you've done is moved from one side of the cave to another. Sure the shadows look a bit different, but it's the same game. If that makes you happier, then good for you.

The goal of this life is happiness and happiness is defined by, IMO, by our worldview. Don't try and insinuate that you are happier or are living a better life through atheism, because you aren't, and it makes you just like the orthodox members of any church that believe that true happiness is only found in living the Gospel.

Read on, my further points may answer some of your concerns. But it is a fact that I am happier and living a better life, subjectively. Did you take from my comments that I think this is the only way to find happiness and meaning? I'm not sure what I said that would lead to that conclusion.

[Moliere]

Read on, my further points may answer some of your concerns. But it is a fact that I am happier and living a better life, subjectively. Did you take from my comments that I think this is the only way to find happiness and meaning? I'm not sure what I said that would lead to that conclusion.

I think the change is profound. I think it makes you value this experience even more, makes you less willing to shrug your shoulders at injustice (God will make it right one day thinking), more willing to experience all kinds of things, more willing to change your mind when new evidence appears, more inclined to feel like you need to get this one shot right. That is how I see many (but certainly not all) people experiencing it. That doesn't mean you can't get many of those things through a belief in the supernatural, desire for reward/fear of punishment, etc. But the belief that religious people are more moral is, in my opinion, an ignorant one.

Sorry, the use of the word "you" in several instances (instead of "me") made me think you were projecting on everyone. It also doesn't help that most exmos I meet seem convinced that every church member would be much happier if they all left the church. There's seems to be a form of elitism that enters people when they leave the church (very few on here seem to have this), and frankly I laugh at that.

I must have misread your post or misinterpreted it. I think I understand it now.

[UtahDan]

Sorry, the use of the word "you" in several instances (instead of "me") made me think you were projecting on everyone. It also doesn't help that most exmos I meet seem convinced that every church member would be much happier if they all left the church. There's seems to be a form of elitism that enters people when they leave the church (very few on here seem to have this), and frankly I laugh at that.

I must have misread your post or misinterpreted it. I think I understand it now.

Sorry if that was unclear. I do think most people experience it that way subjectively. That was my main point, to simply describe it. I'm not going to say that any individual is going to be better off without religion. The entanglements are so numerous and this just increases with age. But I have said before that I think human beings can have many the best parts of religion without the ugly parts. Some positive things do seem to be unique to religious communities so far, however

[SeattleUte]

I think creekster has a point. I try not to do this but I'm going to disagree with my apostate brethren here. I don't think that generalizations can be made that joie de vie or fear of death is affected by being religious or an atheist. The simple reason for this might be that religious people themselves are not as sure of their faith as sometimes they make out to be. I think that youth is wasted on the young is probably closer to the truth. I also think that life is enhanced by education, and religion tends to be an enemy of that.

Martyrs are a whole different class of people altogether and beyond the scope of this post.

I've thought a little more about this and I can't resist clarifying. I think my answer was a lot based on exposure to modern religious people, modern religous people who haven't helped but be influenced by modern norms. "Humanism" or "humanities" is a term born in the Renaissance that means the study of the human condition. Central to this is preoccupation with liberating the human condition to experience sensual pleasure in this brief life, especially during our most vital years. Related to this, is the passion for art and its power to elucidate on human suffering, the quest for meaningful and deep pleasure, itself as a menas to pleasure, etc. Hence modern religion's derision for "secular humanism".

One of Nietzsche's big contributions to philosophy if not the crux of it that endures was his celebration of human life and the here and now and "will to power" and condemnation of Christianity's celebration of ascetcism and the meek and weak. He said: "I would believe only in a God that knows how to Dance". "In heaven, all the interesting people are missing." "One has to pay dearly for immortality; one has to die several times while one is still alive." "That which does not kill us makes us stronger." "The true man wants two things: danger and play. For that reason he wants woman, as the most dangerous plaything." "There is more wisdom in your body than in your deepest philosophy." "What is good? All that heightens the feeling of power, the will to power, power itself in man." "Without music, life would be a mistake." (Courtesy of BrainyQuotes.com.)

I think it's undeniable that begining with he Renaissance our culture has experienced a progressive shift toward seeking after joy in this life from fixation on attaining it in life after death through indifference to it or hostility or guilt about pleasure in this mortal one.

[Omaha 680]

I think it's undeniable that begining with he Renaissance our culture has experienced a progressive shift toward seeking after joy in this life from fixation on attaining it in life after death through indifference to it or hostility or guilt about pleasure in this mortal one.

I agree and as a believer I don't think it's a bad thing. But do you not think this also needs to be tempered somehow? Otherwise we end up with a society of people who won't sacrifice for anything and are only concerned about their own standard of living. Do you think it is sign of a healthy society if more people would riot becuase of a raised retirement age than would like to raise children?

[SeattleUte]

I agree and as a believer I don't think it's a bad thing. But do you not think this also needs to be tempered somehow? Otherwise we end up with a society of people who won't sacrifice for anything and are only concerned about their own standard of living. Do you think it is sign of a healthy society if more people would riot becuase of a raised retirement age than would like to raise children?

I agree with you. What started this thread is that I don't agree with Cardiac and David Brooks, the columnist Cardiac cited (who thoroughly distorted and misapplied an academic study of human behavior to make his point) that we need religion for that.

[CardiacCoug]

I agree with you. What started this thread is that I don't agree with Cardiac and David Brooks, the columnist Cardiac cited (who thoroughly distorted and misapplied an academic study of human behavior to make his point) that we need religion for that.

Sure, we probably don't need organized religion and there's not a lot of empiric evidence that organized religion makes people better.

But Brooks' point about focusing on rectitude, about doing the right thing based on an external societal standard is still right on I think.

The Penn State administrator emails that were leaked recently used the exact words, "Let's play this by ear." Brooks is right on that we need to teach ourselves and our kids to always do the right thing based on external societal standards, not just to "play it by ear" in important moral moments. Principles of organized religion, correctly applied, can help people make the right decisions in these moments.

[RobinFinderson]

Sure, we probably don't need organized religion and there's not a lot of empiric evidence that organized religion makes people better.

But Brooks' point about focusing on rectitude, about doing the right thing based on an external societal standard is still right on I think.

The Penn State administrator emails that were leaked recently used the exact words, "Let's play this by ear." Brooks is right on that we need to teach ourselves and our kids to always do the right thing based on external societal standards, not just to "play it be ear" in important moral moments. Principles of organized religion, correctly applied, can help people make the right decisions in these moments.

I will bet you that the Penn leaders who failed so miserably were more religious, on average, than the rest of the Penn community (just a guess based on their age, and the conservative nature of administrative culture).

[ERCougar]

I will bet you that the Penn leaders who failed so miserably were more religious, on average, than the rest of the Penn community (just a guess based on their age, and the conservative nature of administrative culture).

You really want to start down that path?
Because you'll run into a whole lot of evidence that, while correlational, is a lot stronger than "I bet those bad guys are religious cuz...you know, they're old 'n' stuff".

[RobinFinderson]

You really want to start down that path?
Because you'll run into a whole lot of evidence that, while correlational, is a lot stronger than "I bet those bad guys are religious cuz...you know, they're old 'n' stuff".

No, not really.

[CardiacCoug]

I will bet you that the Penn leaders who failed so miserably were more religious, on average, than the rest of the Penn community (just a guess based on their age, and the conservative nature of administrative culture).

Maybe. I'm just saying they didn't apply their religion, they didn't apply society's standards, they just went with their gut feeling about the "humane" way to deal with the situation.

You probably remember from LDS youth lesson manuals that scenarios are posed and then the kids are asked "What should John do in this situation?". It results in much eye rolling from me internally and of course from the kids, but honestly this Penn State thing makes me think that people need a script. They need to know with no doubt how to act in a big moral moment and have the conviction to follow through. This idea that people naturally do the right thing absent religion or some secular, societal external moral compass is naive.